pith. sign in

arxiv: 2502.17347 · v2 · pith:6JPSBM7Rnew · submitted 2025-02-24 · 💻 cs.RO

SoFFT: Spatial Fourier Transform for Modeling Continuum Soft Robots

Daniele Caradonna , Diego Bianchi , Franco Angelini , Egidio Falotico This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-23 02:04 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 💻 cs.RO
keywords continuum soft robotsFourier transformCosserat rod theorybackbone deformationdata-driven modelingdegrees of freedom reductionspatial signal processing
0
0 comments X

The pith

Treating a soft robot backbone as a space-time signal lets the Fourier transform represent its deformation with fewer variables while keeping accuracy

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper shows that modeling the backbone curve of a continuum soft robot as a signal allows the Fourier transform to give a compact description of its shape changes over time. This unifies different ways of using Cosserat Rod Theory and opens a path to fitting the model directly from experimental measurements instead of assuming shapes in advance. A reader would care because these robots are designed with theoretically unlimited flexibility, yet practical use requires cutting the number of variables needed for simulation or control without distorting how they actually bend. The claim rests on both numerical checks and tests with a physical prototype that confirm the reduced representation still matches observed motion.

Core claim

Viewing the robot's backbone as a signal in space and time, the Fourier transform describes its deformation compactly. This unifies existing modeling strategies within the Cosserat Rod Theory framework and enables a data-driven methodology to experimentally capture the robot's deformation. Validation through numerical simulations and experiments on a real-world prototype demonstrates a reduction in the degrees of freedom while preserving the accuracy of the deformation representation.

What carries the argument

The spatial Fourier transform applied to the time-varying backbone curve, which converts the infinite-dimensional shape into a finite set of frequency coefficients that reconstruct the deformation.

If this is right

  • Unifies existing modeling strategies within Cosserat Rod Theory
  • Offers insights into commonly used heuristic methods
  • Enables a data-driven methodology to experimentally capture the robot's deformation
  • Demonstrates reduction in the degrees of freedom while preserving the accuracy of the deformation representation in simulations and experiments

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The frequency coefficients could serve as a natural low-dimensional state for feedback controllers that run faster than full Cosserat simulations.
  • The same signal view might apply directly to other rod-like continua such as cables or plant stems where deformation data are available.
  • Truncation to low frequencies could act as an implicit smoother that reduces the effect of sensor noise during model fitting from experiments.
  • Integration with learning methods becomes straightforward because the coefficients form a fixed-size vector that can be regressed from limited observations.

Load-bearing premise

The robot backbone deformation must be smooth and band-limited enough that only a small number of Fourier terms capture the essential shape changes without large truncation error.

What would settle it

Measure the position mismatch between a physical soft robot's actual backbone (from motion capture) and the shape rebuilt from a low-order Fourier series; if the average error grows beyond a few percent of the robot length across typical bending motions, the accuracy claim does not hold.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2502.17347 by Daniele Caradonna, Diego Bianchi, Egidio Falotico, Franco Angelini.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Representative scheme for applying the Fourier transform to CSRs. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p001_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Impact of the phase in a planar rod with a sinusoidal curvature [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Comparison of the different spatial discretization methodologies. By treating the strain field as a signal, existing modeling approaches can be interpreted [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Illustration of the proposed data-driven methodology. The robot is subjected to the standard signals and the samples of the strain field are measured [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Sketch of the H-Support robot, a cylindrical CSR with 3 longitudinal [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: A sketch of the Conical H-Support. The conical shape is described by a [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: The space-time spectra of the H-Support numerical example discussed in Sec. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Strain Analysis of the H-Support robot with only an active helicoidal [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_8.png] view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: presents the Bode diagram for the couples κy, σy and κz, σy, where the phase changes rapidly at the resonance and anti-resonance peaks. For the first pair, the phase plot shows that the two phases decrease continuously with an offset of π. Conversely, for the second pair, the phases vary in sync. This behavior reflects the interference patterns observed in the static case during the strain analysis. The s… view at source ↗
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Spatial Spectrum varying the time-frequencies. The spatial harmonics [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_11.png] view at source ↗
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: The space-time spectra of the Conical H-Support numerical example discussed in Sec. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_12.png] view at source ↗
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: The H-Support prototype is a cylindrical robot with 3 longitudinal [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_13.png] view at source ↗
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: The STFT of experimental data from the H-Support prototype. The magnitude values are normalized to [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_14.png] view at source ↗
Figure 15
Figure 15. Figure 15: Comparison between the reconstructed strain through BPD and the experimental strain. In grey the experimental strain samples. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_15.png] view at source ↗
Figure 16
Figure 16. Figure 16: Application of BPD to the experimental data. The coefficients [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_16.png] view at source ↗
Figure 17
Figure 17. Figure 17: Comparison between the experimental and reconstructed backbone using BPD. The last row presents the position and orientation errors, which [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_17.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Continuum soft robots, composed of flexible materials, exhibit theoretically infinite degrees of freedom, enabling notable adaptability in unstructured environments. Cosserat Rod Theory has emerged as a prominent framework for modeling these robots efficiently, representing continuum soft robots as time-varying curves, known as backbones. In this work, we propose viewing the robot's backbone as a signal in space and time, applying the Fourier transform to describe its deformation compactly. This approach unifies existing modeling strategies within the Cosserat Rod Theory framework, offering insights into commonly used heuristic methods. Moreover, the Fourier transform enables the development of a data-driven methodology to experimentally capture the robot's deformation. The proposed approach is validated through numerical simulations and experiments on a real-world prototype, demonstrating a reduction in the degrees of freedom while preserving the accuracy of the deformation representation.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

3 major / 1 minor

Summary. The paper proposes SoFFT, a spatial Fourier transform applied to the backbone curve of continuum soft robots within Cosserat rod theory. It claims this yields a compact representation that unifies existing modeling heuristics, enables data-driven experimental capture of deformation, and achieves a reduction in degrees of freedom while preserving accuracy, as shown in numerical simulations and real-world prototype experiments.

Significance. If the quantitative validation holds, the approach could supply a principled, frequency-domain basis for dimensionality reduction in infinite-DOF soft-robot models, offering a bridge between analytical Cosserat formulations and data-driven methods while clarifying the spectral content implicit in common heuristics.

major comments (3)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: the claim that the method demonstrates 'a reduction in the degrees of freedom while preserving the accuracy of the deformation representation' is unsupported by any reported error metrics, baseline comparisons (e.g., against full-order Cosserat or other reduced models), or truncation-order details; this quantitative gap is load-bearing for the central validation claim.
  2. [Abstract] The weakest assumption—that backbone position/orientation functions are sufficiently band-limited for low-order truncation to incur negligible error—is not tested against localized high-curvature or multi-mode shapes that arise in general Cosserat dynamics; without such cases the reduction claim cannot be generalized.
  3. [Abstract] No explicit integration of the Fourier projection into the strain or equilibrium equations is described, leaving open whether the basis introduces artifacts when substituted into the Cosserat PDEs.
minor comments (1)
  1. [Abstract] The abstract would be strengthened by stating the typical number of retained modes and the observed DOF reduction factor.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

3 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the constructive and detailed comments on our manuscript. We address each major comment point by point below and indicate the revisions we will make.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract: the claim that the method demonstrates 'a reduction in the degrees of freedom while preserving the accuracy of the deformation representation' is unsupported by any reported error metrics, baseline comparisons (e.g., against full-order Cosserat or other reduced models), or truncation-order details; this quantitative gap is load-bearing for the central validation claim.

    Authors: We agree that the abstract would benefit from explicit quantitative support. The full manuscript contains numerical simulations and prototype experiments that include error metrics, comparisons against the full-order Cosserat model, and results at multiple truncation orders. We will revise the abstract to reference these specific metrics and comparisons. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Abstract] The weakest assumption—that backbone position/orientation functions are sufficiently band-limited for low-order truncation to incur negligible error—is not tested against localized high-curvature or multi-mode shapes that arise in general Cosserat dynamics; without such cases the reduction claim cannot be generalized.

    Authors: The presented validation covers a range of deformation modes, yet we acknowledge that additional explicit tests with localized high-curvature and multi-mode shapes would strengthen the generalization of the band-limited assumption. We will incorporate such test cases into the revised manuscript. revision: yes

  3. Referee: [Abstract] No explicit integration of the Fourier projection into the strain or equilibrium equations is described, leaving open whether the basis introduces artifacts when substituted into the Cosserat PDEs.

    Authors: The manuscript derives the spatial Fourier representation from the Cosserat backbone and demonstrates its use in modeling. To make the substitution explicit, we will add a dedicated paragraph in the methods section detailing how the Fourier projection enters the strain and equilibrium equations, together with a brief discussion of potential artifacts supported by the existing numerical results. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: Fourier representation introduced as independent modeling choice

full rationale

The paper presents the spatial Fourier transform as a new lens on the Cosserat backbone curve, enabling compact representation and a data-driven capture method. No equations, parameter-fitting procedures, or self-citations are shown that would make any claimed reduction or unification equivalent to its own inputs by construction. The band-limited assumption is stated as a modeling premise rather than derived from the method itself, and the unification with existing Cosserat strategies is described as an insight rather than a tautology. The derivation chain therefore remains self-contained against external benchmarks.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 0 axioms · 0 invented entities

Abstract-only review; no explicit free parameters, axioms, or invented entities are stated. The approach implicitly assumes the backbone curve admits a useful Fourier expansion, but this is not formalized.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5671 in / 1066 out tokens · 27393 ms · 2026-05-23T02:04:24.673244+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

44 extracted references · 44 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Design, fabrication and control of soft robots,

    D. Rus and M. T. Tolley, “Design, fabrication and control of soft robots,” Nature, vol. 521, no. 7553, pp. 467–475, 2015

    work page 2015

  2. [2]

    A growing soft robot with climbing plant–inspired adaptive behaviors for navigation in unstructured environments,

    E. Del Dottore, A. Mondini, N. Rowe, and B. Mazzolai, “A growing soft robot with climbing plant–inspired adaptive behaviors for navigation in unstructured environments,” Science Robotics , vol. 9, no. 86, p. eadi5908, 2024

    work page 2024

  3. [3]

    Model-based control of soft robots: A survey of the state of the art and open challenges,

    C. Della Santina, C. Duriez, and D. Rus, “Model-based control of soft robots: A survey of the state of the art and open challenges,” IEEE Control Systems Magazine , vol. 43, no. 3, pp. 30–65, 2023

    work page 2023

  4. [4]

    Control strategies for soft robotic manipulators: A survey,

    T. George Thuruthel, Y . Ansari, E. Falotico, and C. Laschi, “Control strategies for soft robotic manipulators: A survey,” Soft robotics, vol. 5, no. 2, pp. 149–163, 2018

    work page 2018

  5. [5]

    Learning controllers for continuum soft manipulators: Impact of modeling and looming challenges,

    E. Falotico, E. Donato, C. Alessi, E. Setti, M. S. Nazeer, C. Agabiti, D. Caradonna, D. Bianchi, F. Piqu ´e, Y . T. Ansari et al. , “Learning controllers for continuum soft manipulators: Impact of modeling and looming challenges,” Advanced Intelligent Systems , p. 2400344, 2024

    work page 2024

  6. [6]

    Soft robots modeling: A structured overview,

    C. Armanini, F. Boyer, A. T. Mathew, C. Duriez, and F. Renda, “Soft robots modeling: A structured overview,” IEEE Transactions on Robotics, vol. 39, no. 3, pp. 1728–1748, 2023

    work page 2023

  7. [7]

    Dynamic model of a multibending soft robot arm driven by cables,

    F. Renda, M. Giorelli, M. Calisti, M. Cianchetti, and C. Laschi, “Dynamic model of a multibending soft robot arm driven by cables,” IEEE Transactions on Robotics , vol. 30, no. 5, pp. 1109–1122, 2014

    work page 2014

  8. [8]

    Forward and inverse problems in the mechanics of soft filaments,

    M. Gazzola, L. H. Dudte, A. G. McCormick, and L. Mahadevan, “Forward and inverse problems in the mechanics of soft filaments,” Royal Society open science , vol. 5, no. 6, p. 171628, 2018

    work page 2018

  9. [9]

    Sorosim: A matlab toolbox for hybrid rigid–soft robots based on the geometric variable-strain approach,

    A. T. Mathew, I. B. Hmida, C. Armanini, F. Boyer, and F. Renda, “Sorosim: A matlab toolbox for hybrid rigid–soft robots based on the geometric variable-strain approach,” IEEE Robotics & Automation Magazine, vol. 30, no. 3, pp. 106–122, 2022

    work page 2022

  10. [10]

    Elastica: A compliant mechanics environment for soft robotic control,

    N. Naughton, J. Sun, A. Tekinalp, T. Parthasarathy, G. Chowdhary, and M. Gazzola, “Elastica: A compliant mechanics environment for soft robotic control,” IEEE Robotics and Automation Letters , vol. 6, no. 2, pp. 3389–3396, 2021

    work page 2021

  11. [11]

    Design and kinematic modeling of constant curvature continuum robots: A review,

    R. J. Webster III and B. A. Jones, “Design and kinematic modeling of constant curvature continuum robots: A review,” The International Journal of Robotics Research , vol. 29, no. 13, pp. 1661–1683, 2010

    work page 2010

  12. [12]

    A geometrically exact model for soft continuum robots: The finite element deformation space formulation,

    S. Grazioso, G. Di Gironimo, and B. Siciliano, “A geometrically exact model for soft continuum robots: The finite element deformation space formulation,” Soft robotics, vol. 6, no. 6, pp. 790–811, 2019

    work page 2019

  13. [13]

    A geometric variable-strain approach for static modeling of soft manipula- tors with tendon and fluidic actuation,

    F. Renda, C. Armanini, V . Lebastard, F. Candelier, and F. Boyer, “A geometric variable-strain approach for static modeling of soft manipula- tors with tendon and fluidic actuation,” IEEE Robotics and Automation Letters, vol. 5, no. 3, pp. 4006–4013, 2020

    work page 2020

  14. [14]

    Dynamics of continuum and soft robots: A strain parameterization based approach,

    F. Boyer, V . Lebastard, F. Candelier, and F. Renda, “Dynamics of continuum and soft robots: A strain parameterization based approach,” IEEE Transactions on Robotics , vol. 37, no. 3, pp. 847–863, 2020

    work page 2020

  15. [15]

    Control oriented modeling of soft robots: The polynomial curvature case,

    C. Della Santina and D. Rus, “Control oriented modeling of soft robots: The polynomial curvature case,” IEEE Robotics and Automation Letters , vol. 5, no. 2, pp. 290–298, 2019

    work page 2019

  16. [16]

    R. N. Bracewell, The F ourier transform and its applications . Second edition. New York : McGraw-Hill, 1978

    work page 1978

  17. [17]

    R. M. Murray, S. S. Sastry, and L. Zexiang, A Mathematical Introduction to Robotic Manipulation , 1st ed. USA: CRC Press, Inc., 1994

    work page 1994

  18. [18]

    Screw- based modeling of soft manipulators with tendon and fluidic actuation,

    F. Renda, M. Cianchetti, H. Abidi, J. Dias, and L. Seneviratne, “Screw- based modeling of soft manipulators with tendon and fluidic actuation,” Journal of Mechanisms and Robotics , vol. 9, no. 4, p. 041012, 2017

    work page 2017

  19. [19]

    Discrete cosserat ap- proach for multisection soft manipulator dynamics,

    F. Renda, F. Boyer, J. Dias, and L. Seneviratne, “Discrete cosserat ap- proach for multisection soft manipulator dynamics,” IEEE Transactions on Robotics , vol. 34, no. 6, pp. 1518–1533, 2018

    work page 2018

  20. [20]

    Siciliano, L

    B. Siciliano, L. Sciavicco, L. Villani, and G. Oriolo, Robotics: Mod- elling, Planning and Control , 1st ed. Springer Publishing Company, Incorporated, 2008

    work page 2008

  21. [21]

    Dynamic control of soft robots interacting with the environment,

    C. Della Santina, R. K. Katzschmann, A. Biechi, and D. Rus, “Dynamic control of soft robots interacting with the environment,” in 2018 IEEE International Conference on Soft Robotics (RoboSoft) . IEEE, 2018, pp. 46–53

    work page 2018

  22. [22]

    The soft inverted pendulum with affine curvature,

    C. Della Santina, “The soft inverted pendulum with affine curvature,” in 2020 59th IEEE Conference on Decision and Control (CDC) . IEEE, 2020, pp. 4135–4142

    work page 2020

  23. [23]

    From the elastica compass to the elastica catapult: an essay on the mechanics of soft robot arm,

    C. Armanini, F. Dal Corso, D. Misseroni, and D. Bigoni, “From the elastica compass to the elastica catapult: an essay on the mechanics of soft robot arm,” Proceedings of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences , vol. 473, no. 2198, p. 20160870, 2017. 15

    work page 2017

  24. [24]

    Model and control of r-soft inverted pendulum,

    D. Caradonna, M. Pierallini, C. Della Santina, F. Angelini, and A. Bic- chi, “Model and control of r-soft inverted pendulum,” IEEE Robotics and Automation Letters , 2024

    work page 2024

  25. [25]

    Piecewise affine curvature model: a reduced-order model for soft robot-environment interaction beyond pcc,

    F. Stella, Q. Guan, C. Della Santina, and J. Hughes, “Piecewise affine curvature model: a reduced-order model for soft robot-environment interaction beyond pcc,” in 2023 IEEE International Conference on Soft Robotics (RoboSoft) . IEEE, 2023, pp. 1–7

    work page 2023

  26. [26]

    Piecewise linear strain cosserat model for soft slender manipulator,

    H. Li, L. Xun, and G. Zheng, “Piecewise linear strain cosserat model for soft slender manipulator,” IEEE Transactions on Robotics , vol. 39, no. 3, pp. 2342–2359, 2023

    work page 2023

  27. [27]

    Cosserat-rod based dynamic modeling of soft slender robot interacting with environment,

    L. Xun, G. Zheng, and A. Kruszewski, “Cosserat-rod based dynamic modeling of soft slender robot interacting with environment,” IEEE Transactions on Robotics , 2024

    work page 2024

  28. [28]

    Geometric numerical integration: Structure-preserving algorithms for ordinary differential equations , volume 31 of springer series in computational mathematics, 2006

    E. Hairer, C. Lubich, and G. Wanner, “Geometric numerical integration: Structure-preserving algorithms for ordinary differential equations , volume 31 of springer series in computational mathematics, 2006.”

    work page 2006

  29. [29]

    Collocation and relaxed collocation for the fer and the magnus expansions,

    A. Zanna, “Collocation and relaxed collocation for the fer and the magnus expansions,” SIAM journal on numerical analysis , vol. 36, no. 4, pp. 1145–1182, 1999

    work page 1999

  30. [30]

    Dynamics and control of soft robots with implicit strain parametrization,

    F. Renda, A. Mathew, and D. F. Talegon, “Dynamics and control of soft robots with implicit strain parametrization,” IEEE Robotics and Automation Letters, 2024

    work page 2024

  31. [31]

    Reduced order modeling of hybrid soft-rigid robots using global, local, and state-dependent strain parameterization,

    A. T. Mathew, D. Feliu-Talegon, A. Y . Alkayas, F. Boyer, and F. Renda, “Reduced order modeling of hybrid soft-rigid robots using global, local, and state-dependent strain parameterization,” The International Journal of Robotics Research , p. 02783649241262333, 2024

    work page 2024

  32. [32]

    Nonlinear modes as a tool for comparing the mathematical structure of dynamic models of soft robots,

    P. Pustina, D. Calzolari, A. Albu-Sch ¨affer, A. De Luca, and C. Della Santina, “Nonlinear modes as a tool for comparing the mathematical structure of dynamic models of soft robots,” in 2024 IEEE 7th International Conference on Soft Robotics (RoboSoft) . IEEE, 2024, pp. 779–785

    work page 2024

  33. [33]

    Soft synergies: Model order reduction of hybrid soft- rigid robots via optimal strain parameterization,

    A. Y . Alkayas, A. T. Mathew, D. Feliu-Talegon, P. Deng, T. G. Thuruthel, and F. Renda, “Soft synergies: Model order reduction of hybrid soft- rigid robots via optimal strain parameterization,” IEEE Transactions on Robotics, p. 1–20, 2024

    work page 2024

  34. [34]

    Fiber optic shape sensors: A comprehensive review,

    I. Floris, J. M. Adam, P. A. Calder ´on, and S. Sales, “Fiber optic shape sensors: A comprehensive review,” Optics and Lasers in Engineering , vol. 139, p. 106508, 2021

    work page 2021

  35. [35]

    Motion capture in robotics review,

    M. Field, D. Stirling, F. Naghdy, and Z. Pan, “Motion capture in robotics review,” in 2009 IEEE international conference on control and automation. IEEE, 2009, pp. 1697–1702

    work page 2009

  36. [36]

    Continuum robot state estimation using gaussian process regression on se (3),

    S. Lilge, T. D. Barfoot, and J. Burgner-Kahrs, “Continuum robot state estimation using gaussian process regression on se (3),” The Interna- tional Journal of Robotics Research , vol. 41, no. 13-14, pp. 1099–1120, 2022

    work page 2022

  37. [37]

    Communication in the presence of noise,

    C. E. Shannon, “Communication in the presence of noise,” Proceedings of the IRE , vol. 37, no. 1, pp. 10–21, 1949

    work page 1949

  38. [38]

    Matching pursuits with time-frequency dictionaries,

    S. G. Mallat and Z. Zhang, “Matching pursuits with time-frequency dictionaries,” IEEE Transactions on signal processing , vol. 41, no. 12, pp. 3397–3415, 1993

    work page 1993

  39. [39]

    Atomic decomposition by basis pursuit,

    S. S. Chen, D. L. Donoho, and M. A. Saunders, “Atomic decomposition by basis pursuit,” SIAM review, vol. 43, no. 1, pp. 129–159, 2001

    work page 2001

  40. [40]

    First-order dynamic modeling and control of soft robots,

    T. George Thuruthel, F. Renda, and F. Iida, “First-order dynamic modeling and control of soft robots,”Frontiers in Robotics and AI, vol. 7, p. 95, 2020

    work page 2020

  41. [41]

    Fast image recovery using variable splitting and constrained optimization,

    M. V . Afonso, J. M. Bioucas-Dias, and M. A. Figueiredo, “Fast image recovery using variable splitting and constrained optimization,” IEEE transactions on image processing , vol. 19, no. 9, pp. 2345–2356, 2010

    work page 2010

  42. [42]

    Soft assistive robot for personal care of elderly people,

    M. Manti, A. Pratesi, E. Falotico, M. Cianchetti, and C. Laschi, “Soft assistive robot for personal care of elderly people,” in 2016 6th IEEE international conference on biomedical robotics and biomechatronics (BioRob). Ieee, 2016, pp. 833–838

    work page 2016

  43. [43]

    D. J. Ewins, Modal testing , 2nd ed., ser. Mechanical Engineering Research Studies: Engineering Dynamics Series. Baldock, England: Research Studies Press, Feb. 1999. Daniele Caradonna earned his M.Sc. degree in Robotics and Automation Engineering from the University of Pisa, Italy, in 2022. He is currently pursuing a Ph.D. in Biorobotics at Scuola Superio...

    work page 1999

  44. [44]

    at the BioRobotics Institute of Scuola Superiore Sant’Anna in Pisa, Italy

    Since 2022, he has been pursuing his Ph.D. at the BioRobotics Institute of Scuola Superiore Sant’Anna in Pisa, Italy. His research focuses on the development of learning-based control algorithms and the design of soft robotic systems. Franco Angelini received the B.S. degree in com- puter engineering in 2013 and M.S. degree (cum laude) in automation and r...

    work page 2022